Armenian diaspora’s idealist opposition to Turkey-Armenian negotiations is understandable, but an outright rejection of the dialogue process is a missed opportunity to introduce ideas and strategies that would empower Armenia.

One of world’s ancient nations and one of its youngest states, Armenia celebrated its 18th anniversary as an independent republic on September 21, 2009.

No country in history has persisted so much invasion, persecution, and genocide.

No country has continuously existed for so long as Armenia has.

And even though today’s Armenia is small, weak and has a declining population of already less than three million, today’s Armenia is one of the best times Armenia has had in thousands of years. Today is Armenia’s gift, and that gift must be used wisely.

Already a young adult, Armenia lives in a world with little room for mistakes. It must democratize, stabilize and normalize its relations with its historic foes to survive in times when today’s errors will be hard to erase tomorrow. As bad as Armenia may seem today, it has the opportunity to invest in a great future.

As the new Armenia is celebrating its entrance to adulthood, its ongoing negotiations with Turkey are in the center of international attention. There have been many articles and discussions on a subject which divides a lot of people, who I will “divide” into two camps – pragmatists and idealists.

Armenia’s current administration, and perhaps most of the citizens in the Republic, wants to normalize relations with Turkey for economic reasons. These are the pragmatists, for who Armenia is the only permanent address they have known, and who want to have a normal social life. I understand this group well. This is the group that is Armenian every second of their life. This is the group that wants to change, improve Armenia and is willing to take the risks. This is the group that ultimately takes all the risks.

I also understand the second group – the idealists. These are the diasporans for whom the Armenian genocide is the centerpiece of Armenian identity. The diaspora would never exist in the first place if there was no genocide. Diaspora’s opposition to the Turkish-Armenian ‘normalization,’ thus, is natural. These are the people that won’t forget how Turkish governments repeatedly lied to Armenians, and how the most trusted of those, the CUP, ended up carrying out the Armenian genocide. These are also the Armenians for who genocide awareness is often the road to staying Armenian. Diasporans have to fight day and night to keep the Armenian identity – unlike the Armenians in Armenia, who – no matter what they do – are Armenians every second.

I understand both groups. I love both sides. I am a son of the genocide itself and a son of the young and small Armenia living in the Diaspora. But when it comes to making a choice for Armenia’s future, I have to be a realist.

The reality is that Armenia’s population, at its best, will stay 3 million for the next decades. Turkey’s 71 million population and Azerbaijan’s 8 million will keep growing, coupled with the rise of ethnic Turkic Azeris in northern Iran. Unless Armenia finds a language with these inconvenient neighbors, it could face the danger of a final genocide.

Finding a common language, to be clear, has nothing to do with forgetting the Armenian genocide. The pragmatists, taking a market-ly speaking neoliberal approach, think that free trade will bring dialogue, and dialogue will bring genocide recognition. The idealists, on the other hand, say that genocide recognition should come first. As noble as the latter sounds, the former seems to make most sense. “Once the border opens,” Turkish historian Taner Akcam told me a few years ago, “Armenians and Turks will find out that they have more things in common than they thought: they have the same daily problems, and none have horns.” He surely belongs in the pragmatist camp, not only in the Armenian but also in the Turkish sense.

Is it bad to be an idealist? Not at all. But the idealist opposition to the “Armenian-Turkish protocols” needs to be a constructive one. Instead of outright rejecting any normalization efforts between Armenia and Turkey, the diaspora idealists must infuse specific and stated strategies that the pragmatists have been unable to include in the negotiations:

 Demand Turkish neutralization in the Nagorno-Karabakh process

 Demand the US government to force Turkey to declare itself a neutral side in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

 Demand Turkey that by 2015 all monuments honoring the perpetrators of the Armenian genocide have separate plaques added describing the crimes they committed during WWI

While the latter is the only point that deals with the genocide, the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh is the most realpolitik task and requires immediate attention. The idealists, overoccupied with genocide recognition, have long neglected the question of Nagorno-Karabakh – the indigenous Armenian region claimed by Azerbaijan.

Turkey remains the biggest obstacle in reaching peace in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict that will guarantee the security of the region’s indigenous population. If Turkey wants to normalize its relations with Armenia, it must stop being pro-Azerbaijani when it comes to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. It must declare itself neutral in the conflict and say that it will honor any decision reached between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

This is the chance for the idealists to make a difference in the normalization process. It’s time to tell Turkey that for Armenians to choose the pragmatist approach – open border first, dialogue second and reconciliation third – Turkey must become objective in the Nagorno-Karabakh process.

17 Responses to “Rethinking Diaspora’s role in Armenia-Turkey relations”

I was expecting better from you than a simplistic reworking of the idealist/realist false choice rhetoric that Turkey and its State Department allies march out every time they would like the Armenians to demonstrate the “vision” and “courage” to make materially dangerous concessions that threaten Armenia’s future.

This argument may have some surface appeal to the inexperienced, but test it against actual reality a few times and you’ll realize that you may very well be making a case for outcomes and interests that you would find deeply troubling.

You must be in denial. After opening the border, signing the protocol, can you guarantee justice will follow? Are you dreaming? haven’t you learned anything from past? How many times Armenians were betrayed? Come on! wake up! enough of rainbow day dreams.

Silva, no, I don’t think anyone can guarantee anything at this point. But the status quo is hurting Armenia. Sitting on your soft diaspora sofa you have little first-hand experience on what the people of Armenia feel and need. Progress is a process, and so is genocide recognition.

Turkey and Azerbaijan consider themselves to be the same people – Turks and Muslims. There is a kinship between them that will never allow Turkey to objectively view Armenia in their dispute with Azerbaijan. They overtly say so!

Turkey has not matured to the point that they desire to normalize relations with Armenia. It is clear that they could care less if the border stays closed with Armenia forever.

I agree, this is unfortunate and does hurt Armenia. However, Armenia must wait until such a time that they strike a “deal” with an honest and repentant Turkey. If that day never comes (and I’m not holding my breath), the status-quo is far better than selling out our just cause for some hope backed with absolutely nothing.

Signing these protocols is beyond stupid politics, it’s treasonous to the thousands of Karabaghtsis who died to live in an independent Artsakh.

Your response to Silva seems to represent a divide/dismiss approach that judges the merit of an argument by the relative comfort of the person articulating that particular point of view.

Is it fair or, for that matter, constructive, to write off vast segments of the Armenian nation on this basis?

Simon, if you are comfortable in your life, does that mean we should not listen to your views? Or, because you sometimes sit on a soft sofa, should we only take heed when your views run in a certain direction?

What exactly is your “upholstery” rule about the correlation between comfort and opinions, and how would you apply it to yourself and others?

I enjoy your writing and hope you have time to visit when you are in DC.

Notice that, in the minds of some Armenians, Turkey’s opening the border with Armenia will necessarily result in tremendous economic growth in Armenia.

Notice the dependency syndrome there. Notice the implicit belief in Armenian weakness. The basic philosophy is: Armenians are dependent on Turkey and must assent to Turkey’s wishes. With assent, all is well, in these people’s minds. The protocols must be ratified, most of these people think. Nevermind the details. Just sign the damn thing.

Also implicit in their arguments is the notion that if Armenia does not essentially give up any and all claims against Turkey, Armenia may be subjected to another genocide by Turkey. Thus, such people are in the backs of their minds afraid of Turkish aggression, but won’t say so. To do so would be to explicitly acknowledge danger.

Recent Turkish behavior against Kurds, and in Cyprus, for example, are dismissed. Turkey is to be depicted as “changing” and benign. You can tell these people that during the 1908 Young Turk revolution, Armenians were dancing in the streets and also declaring “change”. A few years later, there was the genocide. These people think that because they themselves are liberal minded Westerners, Turks must be too. “Dialogue” solves everything to these people. Like a kid who comes home from his first semester at college after taking Psychology 101 and declares to mommy and daddy that he now knows how the world works.
Oh, if only Turks and Armenians could sit around a table, talk, and maybe have sex afterwards, why they’d discover they were all human beings after all. Maybe what we need is a big Turkish Armenian rock concert a la Woodstock to discover that we really are all flower children?

The prospect of genocide as Turkey, as in WW I, once again thrusts to the east, is as real to them as other Armenians, but to acknowledge such a threat is also to acknowledge that their stance is taken due to fear of Turkey, and not necessarily to simply “normalize” relations with Turkey.

If and when Armenia becomes Turkified, let’s face it, these people will be very happy. I claim that if, 50 years from now, Armenia were formally absorbed into, and became a province of, Turkey, these people would simply say, “So what? What’s the harm?” That’s the underlying mindset – weakness, low levels of pride, and capitulation.

How much money do the oligarchs in Armenia stand to make from an open border? Does the present Armenian government have the requisite legitimacy and honesty to sign an important agreement like the Protocols? (No.)

Have you actually visited Armenia recently? They’re doing just fine with a closed border, believe me. I’m witnessing it first-hand.

Armenia really has no major issues right now with a closed border; it will have them when the border opens without dialogue on the Armenian Genocide and other relevant issues to all Armenians beforehand. Take a good look at the protocols please.

Your point about Turkey needing to stay neutral in the NK peace process is certainly valid, but that’s not going to happen so long as Armenia continues to demonstrate its desperation for opening the border without clearing up some very significant things with Turkey first. This is about trust, not economics. And Turkey is showing no signs whatsoever that it can be trusted.

UPDATE: You should notice that I am not saying that the protocols in the current state should be signed (and I am not saying that they shouldn’t be signed either). What I am saying is that those who oppose the protocols should do so not as a matter of principle of saying “no” to any agreement with Turkey, but instead make a list of demands that Armenia must add to any protocols before an agreement goes forward. My main point is that an agreement with Turkey shouldn’t be signed unless Turkey declares itself a neutral party in the Nagorno-Karabakh process. And since Armenia is unfortunately not asking for neutrality, I hope that the diaspora will demand so.

well well well, after all this time…these acts and comments are proving me correct about gor gor davajan spyurks and their secret hatred agenda of Armenia and its ppl. fact is that gor gor davajan spyurks such as most of those who have commented on this post (specifically AH) show how they dont care for Armenia what so ever, they don’t care for future of my wonderful homeland Hayastan and also they show in a very discreet way their hatred of HAYASTANCIS in general

I knew this day would come when Hayastan would eventually have open dialogue with turGAY that would lead to opening border(s) and that gor gor davajan spyurks would be very vehemently against it, regardless if my Hayastan is to sell out genocide or not, regardless if genocide is on table or not, they would protest against any conditions that would lead my Armenia into a prosperous/betterment future.

It is a widely known fact that it is because of gor gor davajan spyurks that Hayastan had its borders closed with our enemy neihbors, and that they (gor gor spyurks) want Hayastan to NOT succeed in any fashion what so ever. Now some of you will immdiately try to knock me and tell me…oh its not for us spyurks there would be no Hayastan today….REALLY??? you gor gor spyurks have lived in Hayastan to suffer at hands of our mafiatic/ruskie putin controlled regime? you have lived in an environment where average one of you makes 100-200$/month as your base salary? you have suffered to make ends meet? you have tried to desperately feed/cloth yourselves and still try to desperately keep a roof over your heads? answer to all those inquiries are NO you have not suffered one bit. you live lavishly and so luxuriously in your phat nice 1/2 million dollar homes in usa/canada/europe…driving your benz/bmw/lexus’s that you dont pay for, and all while committing retail insurance fraud on your privately owned store fronts (more like rackets) and then you “pretend” to care for Hayastan by giving lousy piss poor 100-500$ to mafia controlled himnadram (thats ALL Armeniafund to most of you who dont speak/read/write Armenian language) and then still have audacity to try to “represent” Armenia identity with your gor gor habibi wabibi oglu moglu OMG like I’m an american way of life

You gor gor davajans are such Anti-Hayastan/Hayastanci that you will do and say anything to stop my homeland (REAL ARMENIA) from succeeding to breath once again and have normal smooth economic import/export with out interruptions.

I remember growing up with you gor gor spyurks and how you would always spew out…”omg, I hate these Hayastancis, such bad ppl, such crooks who lie/cheat/steal from everyone”….and then have audacity to act as if you yourselves are so innocent when in fact I have been witnessed and experienced even worst criminilistic acts commmitted by you gor gors

Where was gor gors during Artsakh war? did any of you come flooding into Hayastan to give a helping hand? did any of you want to go to Hayastan in last 20 years with out the force/coersion of some bs group such as birthright Armenia? do you any of you speak/read/write Hayeren more than BAREV or YOUR OWN NAMES? do any of you suffer as Hayastancis have in last 50 years? again simple answer to all questions above is NO

Come tomorrow I will be protesting across street from you gor gor davajan spyurks, my vinyl banner I had made 2 weeks ago is ready and I will be displaying it against you traitors against you so-called wanna be Armenians at your bs protest tomorrow on Sunday 27th. Enough is enough, I am taking a stand against you gor gor davajans and your ANTI-Hayastanism. you gor gors are RACIST/DISCRIMINTORY AGAINST US REAL ARMENIANS all so you can desperately try to keep Armenia down/oppressed and push your bullsh*t UNwinable genocide revenge war that you will never win ever against zionism and their allies (turGAYS)

I will gladly sell out genocide in favor to push ARMENism and slap you gor gors in your TRAITOROUS faces. You are racist, you are discriminitory, you love to hate on Hayastan and add injury to insult you attack on Hayastan and its ppl to be free

and I spit on ANCA/AYF/HMEM/AGBU/AAA and any other ANTI-Hayastanci org, these orgs are the REAL enemies of Armenia, they are INTERNAL enemies, they are more of a threat to my Hayrenik then scum azerGAYS/turGAYS

I have to say I have to agree with Blogian’s pragmatism for all the reasons he gives.

I should also add my own.

I don’t see ANY reason why the Diaspora must stop pursueing Genocide Recognition even after the protocols are ratified. Nothing changes. The struggle continues albeit with other tactics.

What I’m disappointed in is ANCA. They (alongside Assembly’s) recognition drive in the past years has been rather succesful internationally, it has given its fruits but it has expired itself.
This obsession every year with “Is he gonna say it? Is he not?” is naivete at its best. And without any concequences.

We need another tactic. After all, it’s naive to think that when the U.S. or the whole world recognizes it in the next 50-100 years, Turkey will be FORCED to recognize it. Is this the ONLY strategy we have? I just don’t want to believe that the recognition drive was constructed on such weak foundation.

In the last month , Ara Papian has been writing EXCELLENT articles about the relationship of the Armenian Genocide with international law, and our legal case. I ask myself , where was he all this time? Where was ANCA all this time? To make a legal case in the International Court of Justice or anywhere else? Exploring all legal avenues.

Why can’t we think of the protocols as a temporary tactical withdrawal? Why do Armenians have to see things always as black and white? Remember politics is a prostitute. And the end result is what’s important.

I’m also wondering if Aram Hamparian still thinks that we have an ally in Obama and Pelosi?

All said, I think the treaties will be ratified in both parliaments. Fighting them until then is good. But a solid post-protocols strategy should also be developed :

1. To protect Armenia as much as possible from Turkish demographic and economic expansionism.

2. Work dilligently to see and independent Karabagh plus Lachin-Kelbajar internationaly recognized as part of Armenia with MAXIMUM security guarantees.

3. Explore other avenues for Genocide recognition by Turkey. And not become a leash in the international community’s hand , everytime they want to have something from Turkey.

4. Can we capitalize on the fact that there are about a million hidden Armenians in Turkey? Can we capitalize on the fact that 90% of the population in historic Armenian lands are Kurdish? Are we finally be able to have grand visions? Or will we be the slave of our victim mentality?

First of all, anyone who thinks that things are good in Armenia is delusional. There is a country but there is nothing resembling a functional state. If there were a credible argument being made that opening the border will strengthen the country, there would be a lot more support for it.

At the end of the day, we must consider what the motivation for the current negotiations is. In a country where the President and his cronies have a cut in every single business dealing of note, does anyone, diasporan or Hayastantsi, honestly believe that there is an iota of good intentions among the Turks or among the Armenians “government”? This whole affair is so rotten, it’s hard for someone to support it.

The border opening is going to hurt Armenia not because of geopolitical developments (which are quite difficult to predict). Nor will it hut Armenia because of anything related to the Genocide, which never has anything to do with the success of the Republic of Armenia to begin with. It will hurt Armenia because it will strengthen the oligarchs and will result in a emigration that will rival the late 90’s in scope but be quite similar in motivation: Armenians will leave for Turkey because the Turkish government will treat them better in Turkey than the Armenian “government” treats them.

You are the worst kind of idiot – an idiot that think he is clever!
I actually wonder if you are Armenian at all! Why do you not mention the potential we Armenians have if we get united under a honset regime!
We would be the “second Israel” as the Turks themselves put it within a decade!

If the border is ever opened it is likely to be opened on Ankara’s terms, which will be humiliating.
Possible Minimal Turkish stipulation: for Armenia to publicly deny the Armenian genocide(and put pressure on the diaspora for the same) and close that issue forever
Possible Maximal Turkish: give up Artsakh to Azerbaijan, in addition to the minimal stipulation

I do not know where you get your info from Blogian, but you are seriously mistaken, if you think when Turks say the word “peace” they mean the same thing a Westerner would.

Here are some sources:
“The ancient Turks were, according to Gokalp, distinguished by a multitude of excellent qualities: open-handed hospitatily, modesty, faithfulness, courage, uprightness and so forth. Especially praiseworthy was their attitude to the peoples subdued by them. Strong as their love was for their own people, remarks Gokalp with astonishing naivete, they did not oppress other nations. Their God was a god, of peace and the whole object of their rulers was to establish a regime of peace. Devoid of all imperalistic ambitions, the great Turkish conquerors in ancient times only sought to unite other Turkish tribes only.”

“Hukmetme istegi aslinda bir ic-gududur. Her insanda suur-alti bir kuvvet olarak yasar. Bu ic-gudu ayni zamanda baskalarini somurmek icin bir vasitadir. Bazi milletlerin bu yolla istsmarciliga yonelmesi Turklerde mevcut olan “bey gururun”nun onlarda eksik olmasindandir. Beylik gururu, sadece ogunme vesilesi olan basit bir psikoloji degildir. Asli ozelligi, karsilik beklemeden koruyucu olmasidir. Bunun temeli de, hukum altina alinmis insanlari sevmektir.” [2]
…in translation:
“The want to dominate is an instinct. It exists in a human as an unconscious force. This instinct at the same time is a means to exploit. The inclination of some nations to exploit in this manner is because they lack “pride of prince (bey)” that exists among the Turks. The “pride of prince” is not only a simple psychological state for an opportunity to brag. Its main characteristic is protecting (those under one’s domination) without expecting anything in return. The foundation of this is loving the people under one’s domination.”

“No nation has shown as much respect to the beliefs and traditions of foreign elements as our nation. One can even say that it is our nation which is respectful to the religion and nation of members of other religions.” (E. Genç (2006) Primary
School Social Sciences 6, p. 105, Ankara: Ministry of Education Publications).

Basically from all these good indicators a model for “peace a la Turka” can be stated as thus:
after the Ottoman or present Turkish army has conquered a people and after they “benevolently dominate” the conquered nation as inferiors.(or genocide, massacre, ethnically cleanse)

Or in the words of a past “Turkish justice minister”:
“We live in a country called Turkey, the freest country in the world. As your deputy, I feel I can express my real convictions without reserve: I believe that the Turk must be the only lord, the only master of this country. Those who are not of pure Turkish stock can have only one right in this country, the right to be servants and slaves.”
Source: Milliyet, No. 1655, September 16, 1930.

When Turks say “peace” the intention behind their words are mated to a hostile, uneven relationship in the form of master-slave and abuser(Turks)-abused(non-Turks). To ever think the borders can be opened with no humiliating stipulations demanded from the Turkish(that would border on something close to capitulations expected from the losing side in a war) is the actual misplaced idealism.